Former WP cadre says he was 'loyal' but 'fearful' for party reputation, thought Pritam 'indecisive' on Raeesah's case

On the fifth day of the Workers' Party (WP) leader Pritam Singh's trial on Oct. 18, the court heard testimony from former WP cadres Loh Pei Ying and Yudhishthra Nathan. 

Loh and Nathan were aides of former WP MP Raeesah Khan at the time of her telling an untrue anecdote in parliament in 2021.

The prosecution started their examination-in-chief of Nathan in the afternoon.

Among other topics, the questions revealed certain details about preparation made for Raeesah to come clean, from Nathan's point of view.

Personal statement on Nov. 1 could not have been done in one sitting

The prosecution asked Nathan if he had been involved in drafting Raeesah's personal statement for Nov. 1, 2021, when she came clean to Parliament about her lie.

Nathan said that while the initial draft was by Raeesah herself, Loh and himself provided various inputs when she showed them her draft, and there were also several iterations.

Nathan added that he had met Raeesah two or three times about the drafts.

Nathan also said Raeesah had shared the draft with her parents, as well as the WP Central Executive Committee (CEC) at some point.

The prosecution asked Nathan if he could recall the duration of time for which he was involved in Raeesah's draft up to when it was finalised.

He said that it had to be around "half a month" between roughly Oct. 12 and Nov. 1.

"Could all these preparations have been done in one day?" the prosecution then asked

"No… not in my view," he replied.

Relates to the second charge against Singh

Nathan's testimony relates to the second charge brought against Singh: Namely, that he had lied to the COP that when he spoke to Raeesah on Oct. 3, 2021, he wanted her to admit to having lied to Parliament about the original anecdote if the issue were to come up in parliament the next day on Oct. 4.

The prosecution argued that there was no way Singh intended for the untruth to be clarified in parliament on Oct. 4, given how there were no preparatory steps taken.

They highlighted that there was no clarificatory statement prepared for or by Raeesah.

This was contrasted with the careful preparations undertaken over more than two weeks from Oct. 12 to Oct. 31, 2021, for Raeesah's eventual clarification on Nov. 1, 2021.

"Vacillating" between alleged party position of maintaining lie & coming clean

Nathan told the prosecution that in the aftermath of law and home affairs minister K Shanmugam's questioning of Raeesah in parliament on Oct. 4, 2021, he, Loh and Raeesah were, from Oct. 4 and Oct. 12, "vacillating" between whether they should "maintain the lie, that is keep to the leader's position, or if [Raeesah] should come clean in some way".

Nathan said:

“We had been loyal members of the party, perhaps contrary to what some people may say today, but we were fearful for the party which we had been in for so long."

He also spoke about their concerns that Raeesah's coming clean would hurt WP's reputation, and said the "party position" at the time was against her doing so.

He said:

"At that critical point in time, when Raeesah was questioned by Minister Shanmugam, we were very, very afraid of what coming clean would mean for the reputation of the WP, and I will speak for myself, though Loh shared some of the same fears... the fear was that the reputation of the WP would take an unrecoverable hit…

My next point is that we had these fears at a time when one might say we were operating in an environment where the party position was that she should not come clean, based on what I knew at that time."

Low Thia Khiang felt Raeesah would have time to rebuild before the next GE

Nathan said he asked Singh during their meeting on the evening of Oct. 12 about former WP Chief Low Thia Khiang's view of the situation.

"I see Low as someone whose judgment I trust very much," he said, adding that he was a "seasoned" and "principled" politician.

Apparently, upon finding out about Raeesah's lie, Low was of the view that Raeesah should come clean "as soon as possible".

Nathan also said that it was Low's view that Raeesah "still had time to rebuild support from the ground" ahead of the next election.

Low is expected to testify as a prosecution witness in the trial.

Thought Singh was "rather indecisive" on Oct. 3

The prosecution asked Nathan about his meeting with Singh and Loh, on Oct. 12.

Nathan said that Singh "had conveyed to us that night on Oct. 12 that on Oct. 3 he had paid a visit to Ms Khan's house, and that he had conveyed to Ms Khan that whether she decided to continue the lie or narrative… or whether she decided to tell the truth, he would not judge her." 

Nathan said that while he did not verbally express it, he thought it was “rather indecisive” of Singh to have said that to Raeesah at the time.

The judge then asked Nathan to clarify his understanding of Singh's phrase, "He would not judge her".

Nathan said: "My understanding was that he was leaving it open to her. Whatever option, if she chose to maintain the lie, he would have no problem with that.”

What Singh meant when he said he would not "judge" Raeesah is significant, as part of the prosecution's case against Singh is that he "intentionally guided" Raeesah to maintain the untruth even if it came up in parliament, and gave her the impression that she could choose to continue with the untrue narrative, saying he would not judge her.

Earlier on Oct. 18, Loh had also testified on her interpretation of the phrase, and was asked about possible alternate interpretations.

Raeesah was "fearful" of party leadership

The prosecution asked Nathan about messages he received on Nov. 13 from Raeesah.

According to the messages, Singh said there was no point in Raeesah "continuing" if she did not have the support of her Sengkang GRC colleagues.

Nathan replied, "What does [Singh] want you to do, resign?", to which Raeesah said, "I think he does".

Nathan replied that Singh would be getting off "scot-free".

He also added that Raeesah could "damage Singh's reputation if [she] reveal the truth" at the COP.

Raeesah responded: "I would not do that".

Nathan was asked by the prosecution to clarify his understanding of Raeesah's response.

"My understanding was that she was fearful of the prospect of telling the COP that the leaders had indeed been involved in her maintaining the lie," Nathan said.

He added: "She was afraid of the party leaders, she was afraid of them in general actually."

He said that when she had first joined the party, Raeesah felt that Singh had "sometimes been a bit harsh with her", though she was "not the only new MP a tad fearful of what the leaders thought of them."

Earlier on Oct. 18, the defence concluded their cross-examination of Loh, followed by the prosecution’s re-examination of Loh.

The trial continues on Monday (Oct. 21).

What else was said on Day 5 of the trial:

Top photo from Amber Tay